XSeries-forum

Well here we go. Due in the UK in 2013 if Home Office Approval is granted.

The bad news is that it simultaneously checks:
Speed
Occupants wearing a seatbelt
Road Tax
Insurance
Tailgating
Road conditions - adapts its profile accordingly!

Trailer mounted with generator, runs for 8 hours and has a dirct radio link back to Police/Road Safety Partnerships. It's called ASSET. Made in Finland, costs £50,000 a pop and received £7.1M in development grants from Europe.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_f98opUNuVXc/T ... camera.jpg

Wow can't wait NOT ;(

One tiny problem ... it relies on number plates.

[quote=""X5Sport""]....The bad news is that it simultaneously checks.....[/quote]

Speed........The pro's & con's of speed cameras have been discussed for years. Many feel that If used then should be clearly & advance sign warned & only used where able to significantly reduce casualty numbers at speed related serious collision sites, (not stealth operated on safe roads).

Seatblelts.....No issue with this whatsoever. Hopefully less fatalities & associated grief that results when not worn.

Road Tax......If I pay it then so should everyone else, (in absence abolishment or fair incorporation into insurance premiums &/or fuel). As to whether the duty yielded is fairly spent...... that's another matter.

Insurance......No issue. Harsher penalties would be good. Hopefully will be used in areas with high proportions of insurance dodgers. Personally I would like to see No Insurance Cameras on the majority of roads & including residential areas where offenders live.

Tailgating..... Dangerous & dangerously distracting in so many circumstances. I hope folk won't be prosecuted for moving up behind cars prior to a well planned overtake on single carrageway roads. I suspect camera related prosecutions of tailgaters will mainly result from footage captured on motorways & may involve footage or images captured by more than one device.

Road conditions.......No issue here if technology genuinely facilitates sensible discretion & proportion where prosecution appropriate. I can't comment further in absence of more info.


Some could argue that VOSA should operate cameras. ........Many, (generally law abiding), road users may feel unhappy towards Police if they perceive robust use of Police Traffic Enforcement Camera's at times when they feel frontline policing, criminal justice & the courts are letting them &/or decent others down.

After all the recent civil unrest, successive governments persist in policing by remote control......fecking idiots the lot of them.

Well that's a slightly briefer response than my ramblings above.

In practice the kit may be likely to be used by a civilian.... I have outlined the case for these being used by VOSA & not the police.

Speed aside - I can't see why any decent motorist would have an issue with folk being appropriately prosecuted for the newly detectable matters.

Despite the above it will be hard to defend the purchase & use of new kit where concerns exist regarding civil disorder & frontline policing services

I agree. There is too much reliance on remote tech, whilst avoiding getting involved where physical presence and action is really required. Having been appalled at the sight of about 100 Police officers watching a riot as if it was a group of over exuberant yooffs rather than the mindless thugs they really were, did rather damage my confidence in UK Policing. They really should have gone in and sorted the lot of them out.

[quote=""X5Sport""]I agree. There is too much reliance on remote tech, whilst avoiding getting involved where physical presence and action is really required. [/quote]

Yet many would prefer to see a camera on a post rather than an officer being paid to point a speed gun out of the back of a van on a relatively safe road.

[quote=""X5Sport""] Having been appalled at the sight of about 100 Police officers watching a riot.....They really should have gone in and sorted the lot of them out.[/quote]

Impossible to constructively reply without knowing all facts of the specific footage, but sometimes there is a bigger picture. Nobody can argue that Police weren't overwhelmed. Like others I was disappointed to see rioting when Police were present. Not defending police inaction(s) but in Croydon for example Police managed to prevent the 1.3m sq/ft Whitgift centre being looted as well as protecting Oxford Street & other keys sites.

Without debating tragic G20 consequences.....The prospect of sacking & prison for pushing someone over may be unappealing for many officers.



Keen not to go off topic & debate public order tactics & thus feel need to repeat my prior comments........... [quote=""AW8""]
Despite the above it will be hard to defend the purchase & use of new kit where concerns exist regarding civil disorder & frontline policing services[/quote]

If they added 'Middle Lane Morons' and mouth-breathing idiots who don't use indicators I might be slightly more in favour of this thing...

It was Croydon I think...

and I would rather a Police Officer with a camera able to use judgement, than an automated box, though I do agree that they have their place too. I don't in any way condone speeding, especially as I live in an area with an issue where the Community is struggling to get any decent response from the local Police/Camera Partnership despite a survey showing 49% of traffic on the affected road being more than 10mph over the limit. Some traffic has been logged at 50mph OVER the limit - but no injuries, so little interest.

We have even volunteered to assist if they can't resource properly, but even that has been rejected. Not even pressure from our local MP has helped.

I also feel that anyone on the road illegally for whatever reason deserves everything they get.

When, or should I say if, the political will changes we can perhaps return to a police "FORCE" and that should become the deterent.

We all know the places where fixed and mobile cameras are sited and we slow down to ensure we don't get nicked. If it was safe to do 40 at these sites we would if it wasn't for the cameras. There are many non camera sites where we drive at 20 because it's unsafe to drive faster. Only a complete moron will drive faster and deserves to be hammered. Problem is without an effective police force those that speed in these areas will never get their come uppence.

Let's have a visble police force on the roads and in our streets to ensure the law is obeyed.It doesn't matter if it's driving or rioting.

[quote=""Waka""]If they added 'Middle Lane Morons' and mouth-breathing idiots who don't use indicators I might be slightly more in favour of this thing...[/quote]

Indicating & lane hogging (& fwiw tailgating), are of course only breaches of the Highway Code & can only be used to support allegations of careless, inconsiderate, (or in extreme cases dangerous), driving. These offences carry points......just imagine how many would end up banned before long. I suspect most would regard widespread camera use for such matters as OTT.

[quote=""X5Sport""]It was Croydon I think...[/quote]

Still impossible to constructively comment in absence seeing footage &/or knowing full facts. Considering the number of officers on the ground relative to offenders, (looters allegedly attacking one another & major fires), I suspect, (at times), monitoring to prevent loss of life would have been priority over theft. Not defending every decision the Police made was correct in heat of riots but we don't know the facts relative to that specific footage

[quote=""Denis O""]Let's have a visble police force on the roads and in our streets to ensure the law is obeyed.It doesn't matter if it's driving or rioting.[/quote] Agreed......though preventing riots & disorder must take priority.